I am intrigued by the genetic relationship between Z253 and Z255, and wonder what language these two lineages could have spoken since they share a common ancestor around 700 BCE.

It looks like Z253 will be much more plentiful on the Continent, since we already see it in Spain, Switzerland, and Norway. Could both lineages be the first Celtic-speaking settlers of Britain and Ireland? And if so, would the language be more akin to Gaelic or a Brythonic variety?

I am intrigued by the genetic relationship between Z253 and Z255, and wonder what language these two lineages could have spoken since they share a common ancestor around 700 BCE.

It looks like Z253 will be much more plentiful on the Continent, since we already see it in Spain, Switzerland, and Norway. Could both lineages be the first Celtic-speaking settlers of Britain and Ireland? And if so, would the language be more akin to Gaelic or a Brythonic variety?

Well the question is when did the Celtic languages start to breakup. I know there was a study published several years ago in Nature which put a speration date of Irish and Welsh at at least 900BC. From what's known of the corpus of Gaulish and "Archaic Irish" (what Ogham stones are written in) there is very little in way of difference other then obvious sound changes which occurred in Gaulish (Q -> P)

More then likely a thousand years beforehand the difference between what became the seperate Celtic languages was basically dialectically. It would have been less then say difference between Danish, Swedish and Norwegian today.

I am intrigued by the genetic relationship between Z253 and Z255, and wonder what language these two lineages could have spoken since they share a common ancestor around 700 BCE.

It looks like Z253 will be much more plentiful on the Continent, since we already see it in Spain, Switzerland, and Norway. Could both lineages be the first Celtic-speaking settlers of Britain and Ireland? And if so, would the language be more akin to Gaelic or a Brythonic variety?

Well the question is when did the Celtic languages start to breakup. I know there was a study published several years ago in Nature which put a speration date of Irish and Welsh at at least 900BC. From what's known of the corpus of Gaulish and "Archaic Irish" (what Ogham stones are written in) there is very little in way of difference other then obvious sound changes which occurred in Gaulish (Q -> P)

More then likely a thousand years beforehand the difference between what became the seperate Celtic languages was basically dialectically. It would have been less then say difference between Danish, Swedish and Norwegian today.

Welsh didn't exist in 900BC it hadn't evolved yet it wasn't until the post Roman period that Welsh emerged from Brittonic/British.

I am intrigued by the genetic relationship between Z253 and Z255, and wonder what language these two lineages could have spoken since they share a common ancestor around 700 BCE.

It looks like Z253 will be much more plentiful on the Continent, since we already see it in Spain, Switzerland, and Norway. Could both lineages be the first Celtic-speaking settlers of Britain and Ireland? And if so, would the language be more akin to Gaelic or a Brythonic variety?

Well the question is when did the Celtic languages start to breakup. I know there was a study published several years ago in Nature which put a speration date of Irish and Welsh at at least 900BC. From what's known of the corpus of Gaulish and "Archaic Irish" (what Ogham stones are written in) there is very little in way of difference other then obvious sound changes which occurred in Gaulish (Q -> P)

More then likely a thousand years beforehand the difference between what became the seperate Celtic languages was basically dialectically. It would have been less then say difference between Danish, Swedish and Norwegian today.

Welsh didn't exist in 900BC it hadn't evolved yet it wasn't until the post Roman period that Welsh emerged from Brittonic/British.

That's not my point. the seperation date is for what became Goidelic and what became Brythonic. Using the modern proxies of Modern Welsh and Modern Irish to infer seperation date.

I do admit I could have put it across a bit better but here's the logic.

Welsh descendes from Proto-Brythonic, Irish from Proto-Goidelic. The dialectics in the "Proto-Celtic" continuum that became Proto-Goidelic and Proto-Brythonic started to spilt around 900BC. Ergo Modern-Irish and Modern-Welsh are seperated by about 2,900 years of "near independent" linguistic development.

I use the term "near independent" because it appears that there is influence between the two during the early Christian period. This mainly as the early Christian church in Ireland (which was missonary in nature) was heavily Brythonic in character.

Archaeologically, the best proxy for the diverging of Celtic languages seems to be at some point towards the end of the Hallstatt C period when the Q-Celtic areas seems to have become less in touch with the later P-Celtic areas for several centuries. Contact between Britain and the continent was also reduced but not entirely as Hallstatt D material in Britain shows. I suspect the Irish started to diverge from the rest c. 700BC and that was magnified somewhat when the P-Q change spread soon after.

Archaeologically, the best proxy for the diverging of Celtic languages seems to be at some point towards the end of the Hallstatt C period when the Q-Celtic areas seems to have become less in touch with the later P-Celtic areas for several centuries. Contact between Britain and the continent was also reduced but not entirely as Hallstatt D material in Britain shows. I suspect the Irish started to diverge from the rest c. 700BC and that was magnified somewhat when the P-Q change spread soon after.

Even then the level of speration was quite minimum for several hundred years. Archaic Irish (the language of Ogham stones) is remarkably similar to Gaulish, apart from of course preservation of more "archaic" features in it. The big changes in Irish seem to occur with rise of Christianity. Some have argue of course that what was written in Ogham was an archaic soicolect reflecting the learned classes. With the rise of christianity we see a rebasing of the language around what became known as "Old Irish" (loss of inflectional endings for example)

I am intrigued by the genetic relationship between Z253 and Z255, and wonder what language these two lineages could have spoken since they share a common ancestor around 700 BCE.

It looks like Z253 will be much more plentiful on the Continent, since we already see it in Spain, Switzerland, and Norway. Could both lineages be the first Celtic-speaking settlers of Britain and Ireland? And if so, would the language be more akin to Gaelic or a Brythonic variety?

I was pretty surprised when I looked at the FTDNA project page for Z255, the Irish Sea cluster. There are some Celtic names but to my eye there are more non-Celtic ones, some of possible Viking and Norman ancestry. I dont know what to make of it or indeed Z253 or their relationship to each other.

I would check for a typo... on the L21. Surely the lab noticed this and, if so, why the .2 assignment?

Yes, that is the fellow. Mike made the suggestion that he should test for Z255, and I agree. But I predict Colangelo to test Z255-. His MDKA is from Italy, I believe.

He could well be Z255-. I just picked Z255 as the first of the big five for him to test for if he wanted to proceed with ala carte SNP testing. If I was him, I would test for Z255, although the odds may not be much different than of getting a base hit.

Which in turn descends from Proto-Brythonic and then Proto-Celtic, then Proto-Italic-Celtic then Proto-IE. Thus modern welsh is clearly a descendant of Proto-Brythonic. If it wasn't then it wouldn't be a Brythonic language.

The argument is like saying that Modern German doesn't descend from "Proto-Germanic" but instead from "Old High German"

Which in turn descends from Proto-Brythonic and then Proto-Celtic, then Proto-Italic-Celtic then Proto-IE. Thus modern welsh is clearly a descendant of Proto-Brythonic. If it wasn't then it wouldn't be a Brythonic language.

The argument is like saying that Modern German doesn't descend from "Proto-Germanic" but instead from "Old High German"

I think a lot of people seem to think the P-Q division in Celtic is some sort of root division when in fact the P-Q change is just a shift that happened fairly late among some Celts and not others. I am not sure of the date but those who link the Celt-Iberian culture of east-central Spain with adjacent urnfield remains should bear in mind that, if that correlation is true, then this shows urnfield Q-Celts. Lepontic of course is also linked to very late Urnfield intrusions into north Italy by many and it seems to have been P-Celtic or certainly became so by the earliest inscriptions. I am quite taken by the idea that the P-Q shift happened first in north Italy under Etruscan influence and the shift spread due to the very strong phase of contract in the Hallstatt D phase between west north Alpine chiefdoms (who must have been very prestigious in the Celtic world and emulated) and Italy.

I think a lot of people seem to think the P-Q division in Celtic is some sort of root division when in fact the P-Q change is just a shift that happened fairly late among some Celts and not others. I am not sure of the date but those who link the Celt-Iberian culture of east-central Spain with adjacent urnfield remains should bear in mind that, if that correlation is true, then this shows urnfield Q-Celts. Lepontic of course is also linked to very late Urnfield intrusions into north Italy by many and it seems to have been P-Celtic or certainly became so by the earliest inscriptions. I am quite taken by the idea that the P-Q shift happened first in north Italy under Etruscan influence and the shift spread due to the very strong phase of contract in the Hallstatt D phase between west north Alpine chiefdoms (who must have been very prestigious in the Celtic world and emulated) and Italy.

Indeed "Archaic Irish" as perseved in Ogham inscriptions is very close to the suriviving corpus of Gaulish, Other then aforementioned sound change. If we are gonna take a "telescopic" view back to period in the 1st century BC more then likely we would see a dialectical contiunum of closely related dialects across the entire expanse of "Celtic Europe". No different then say the dialectical range across Germany for exaple form "Low German" in the north to the High German in south. With specific isoglosses marking dialectical borders.

Or one could look at the Tuscan dialects of Italian. (Though some would argue modern Italian grew out of Tusany) which have the following feature that sets them apart from standard italian.

Indeed "Archaic Irish" as perseved in Ogham inscriptions is very close to the suriviving corpus of Gaulish, Other then aforementioned sound change.

Now that is interesting. I wonder if the first wave of Celts into Ireland spoke a P-Celtic tongue, or something more similar to Gaulish, and changed over time into Archaic Irish.

I think of Z255, its distribution in Leinster, and Rahilly's historical model which assigns the Laigin a P-Celtic tongue. I am not sure if the Irish sagas are accurate, but the story goes that the Laigin were Gaulish or British soldiers invited to Ireland to reclaim the kingship for Labraid Loingsech.

Besides the obvious clusters of Z255 in England and Scotland, there are also Z255+ samples with Rhineland German surnames: Schneider, Rosenburg, and Boston (formerly Bastian, family genealogy traces to the Rhineland).

I was looking for more information on the Druidry on the continental side as I was reading a book my father in law lent me; The Book or Druidry by Ross Nichols published in 1990. I found this overview online discuss Ogham origin and original alphabet. (I advise copying the text and read it in note pad or word due to the boarder running down the middle right of the screen)

Indeed "Archaic Irish" as perseved in Ogham inscriptions is very close to the suriviving corpus of Gaulish, Other then aforementioned sound change.

Now that is interesting. I wonder if the first wave of Celts into Ireland spoke a P-Celtic tongue, or something more similar to Gaulish, and changed over time into Archaic Irish.

I think of Z255, its distribution in Leinster, and Rahilly's historical model which assigns the Laigin a P-Celtic tongue. I am not sure if the Irish sagas are accurate, but the story goes that the Laigin were Gaulish or British soldiers invited to Ireland to reclaim the kingship for Labraid Loingsech.

Besides the obvious clusters of Z255 in England and Scotland, there are also Z255+ samples with Rhineland German surnames: Schneider, Rosenburg, and Boston (formerly Bastian, family genealogy traces to the Rhineland).

No the "Q" in Q-Celtic is a feature of both Proto-Celtic and Proto-Indo-European. For example "Mycenaean Greek" as written in "Linear B" could be called Q-Greek. This developed into a p phoneme in certain conditions in ancient-Greek. The same of course happened with "Celtic". The fact that the "Labialized Velar Consonant" was perseved in Goidelic and Celtiberian points to Ireland and Spain been on the periphery when the shift to "P" happened. Some have argued that this is reflective of the Irish dark ages from 800-200BC.

Of course in Old Irish the "Q" (written by linguists as k^w -- k to power w) shifted to a K sound. Thence hard C in Irish been pronunced as a K.

Dating on Ogham is quite problematic, there are both older and newer styles of inscription, based on the language on the stones. There was an article published a couple years ago on the Silchester Ogham stone (found in roman site of Silchester in England). The archaelogical report points to the well in which the stone was located been filled in during the late 4th/early 5th century. This put's the use of Ogham in the period 375-425AD which is in the late pre-christian period.

Leaving aside that the language on the stones is quite archaic especially compared to Old Irish, which is the language found in Christian writings etc. Some have argued that it was a specific archaic register of the language used by learned classes. This ties in with some of terminology on the stones which are regarded as pre-christian. For example use of word "muco" (tribe). It wouldn't surprise me if the developent of Ogham is a feature of the late "Pre-history" of Ireland, during contact with Roman Britain. After all it's basically a cipher of Latin Alphabet. (3rd-5th centuries AD)

#justathought But was there not a language used in Eire, before Archaic Gaelic, a handful of relic terms may which have survived?

"Archaic Irish" is a term specific to inscriptions in Ogham. Which is in reality just a snapshot of a particular time. Before then the language was purely spoken. Before this you would be looking at just "Goidelic" and then proto-Celtic

Obviously there was a pre-Celtic language in Ireland as the island has been inhabited for close to 10k years. One of the very unusual features of "Insular Celtic" (Goidelic and Brythonic) is that they are VSO (Verb Subject Object) compared to most European languages which are SVO (or partially SOV) -- english is svo

Other VSO also features in semetic languges such as Classic Arabic, Classical Hebrew, Berber, Austronesian languages (Malay, Filipino, Tongan) and others.

Some have argue that the fact that this is a feature of modern Irish and Welsh is an artifact of these languages been overlaided onto a earlier population who spoke a VSO language. In comparison Gaulish and Leptonic are generally SOV